Gujarat High Court
Dharmeshbhai Muljibhai Ranpariya … vs State Of Gujarat on 17 December, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 24673 of 2024
==========================================================
DHARMESHBHAI MULJIBHAI RANPARIYA (PATEL)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PRASHANTKUMAR R SHARMA(8591) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MANAN MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 17/12/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed by the present
applicant – original accused, seeking for following reliefs:
“A. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow
this petition;
B. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set
aside the F.I.R 11202008242214 of 2024 dated 08.12.2024
registered before City “A” Div. Police Station, Jamnagar for
the offences punishable under Section 506 (2) of the Indian
Penal Code and section 5,39,40,42 of the Gujarat Money
Lenders Act and any consequential proceedings passed and
annexed ANNEXURE – A; atC. Pending the petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased
Page 1 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
to issue stay on F.I.R 11202008242214 of 2024 dated
08.12.2024 registered before City “A” Div. Police Station,
Jamnagar for the offences punishable under Section 506 (2)
of the Indian Penal Code and section 5,39,40,42 of the
Gujarat Money Lenders Act;
D. Ad-interim relief in terms of Para (C) may kindly be
granted;
E. Any other and further relief as deemed fit and proper
may be granted in favour of the Petitioner.”
2. Heard Mr. Prashantkumar Sharma, learned advocate
for the applicant and Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP
for the respondent – State.
3. Mr. Prashantkumar Sharma, learned advocate for
the applicant has submitted that on bare reading of the
FIR, and considering the materials available on the
record, it transpires that while the complainant was
admitted in the hospital, and that that time, he has
given statement whereby he has also admitted that he
has issued the cheques and given the same to the
applicant to hand over some other person. He has
submitted that the accused has not played any active
Page 2 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
participation though the allegations made in the FIR to
the extent that he has played some active role. He has
further submitted that the complainant has himself
stated in his interview that he has attempted to commit
suicide because Mr. Ramesh Gorasiya was demanding
Rs.30 lakh, however, surprisingly the complaint came to
be lodged only against him i.e. the present applicant. He
has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of
Sajidbeg Asifbeg Mirza vs. State of Gujarat reported in
(2007) 1 GLH 400 and has submitted that TV interview
can be used as evidence in a case where it has been
given, gives more weight to the say ‘Think before you
speak’. He has further submitted that the delay of
almost after 16 months (495 days) is occurred in lodging
of FIR. He has also submitted that on bare reading of
the FIR, ingredients under Section 506(2) of the IPC is
not satisfied neither any allegation under the Gujarat
Money Lenders Act are met with necessary requirements.
Furthermore, he has relied upon the decision of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Manik Taneja vs.
State of Karnataka, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 423. In
view of the above, he has prayed for interference of this
Court.
Page 3 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
4. Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP for the respondent
– State has submitted that prima facie, case is made
and there is serious allegation made against the present
applicant and if all the contentions raised in the present
application are accepted, it would amount to appreciation
of evidence at this stage, which is not permissible under
the eyes of law and, therefore, when the prima facie,
case is made out, and it cannot be said that the present
complaint is an abuse of process of law. Hence, he has
submitted that no interfere is required to be called for
by this Court.
5.1 I have considered the rival submissions made at the
bar. I have also considered the fact that on bare reading
of the FIR, it transpires that FIR is lodged at the
belated stage, when there is no specific explanation about
occurrence of delay occurred in lodging of FIR, but from
the facts stated in the FIR, and from the chronology of
events, it transpires that it cannot be said that merely
because there is delay in lodging of FIR, such offences
as alleged in the FIR are not made out at this stage.
Furthermore, it is fruitful to refer the provisions of
Page 4 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
Section 506 of the IPC and Sections 5, 39, 40, and 42 of
the Gujarat Money Lenders Act, as under:
“Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860:-
506. Punishment for criminal intimidation.–
Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall
be punished with imprison-ment of either description for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with
both;
If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.– And if
the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause
the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an
offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, or
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven
years, or to impute, unchastity to a woman, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with
both.
Section 5 in Gujarat Money-Lenders Act, 2011:-
5. No business of money-lending except registration.
(1) No Money-Lender shall commence or carry on the
business of money-lending except in the area for which he
has been granted a registration and except in accordance
with the terms and conditions of such registration.
(2) Non-banking finance companies registered under the
provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, (2 of
1934) with the Reserve Bank of India shall be deemed to
have been registered for the purposes of this Act and theyPage 5 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
shall intimate to the concerned Registrar about their such
registration with the Reserve Bank of India in the
prescribed proforma.
39. Prohibition against recovery of loan or interest except in
cash.
– Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any
other law’ for the time being in force, no Money-Lender
shall recover the principal of the loan advanced by him or
the interest thereon either in part or in whole except in
cash.
40. Penalty for molestation.
– Whoever molests or abets the molestation of a debtor for
the recovery’ of a loan due by him to a Money-Lender
shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to two years and with fine which
may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees :
Provided that in absence of the special and adequate
reasons to the contrary to be mentioned in the judgements
of the Court –
(i) for the first offence, such imprisonment shall not be less
than six months and such fine shall not be less than ten
thousand rupees;
(ii) for the second and subsequent offences, such
imprisonment shall not be less than one year and such fine
shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees.
Explanation. – For the purposes of this section, a person
who, with intent to cause another person to abstain from
doing any act which he has a right to do or to do any act
Page 6 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
which he has a right to abstain from doing-
(a) obstructs or uses violence to or intimidates such other
person, or
(b) persistently follows such other person from place to
place or interferes with any property owned or used by him
or deprives him of, or hinders him in the use thereof, or
(c) loiters near a house or other place where such other
person resides or works, or carries on business, or happens
to be, or does any act calculated to annoy or intimidate
such other person,
shall be deemed to molest such other person :
Provided that a person who goes to such house or place in
order merely to obtain or communicate information shall not
be deemed to molest.
– Whoever-
(a) carries on the business of money-lending in any area
without registration in contravention of section 5; or
(b) fails to produce any record or document in compliance
with any requirement made under sub-section (1) of section
19 or knowingly produces any false record or document; or
(c) obstructs any officer making an entry, inquiry, search,
seizure or entrance under sub-section (2) of section 19: or
(d) demands, charges or receives from a debtor the interest
at higher rate in contravention of sub-section (3) of section
33; or
(e) accepts any promissory note, acknowledgement bond or
other writing or document or any instrument in
contravention of section 38; or
Page 7 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
(f) tempers with debtors’ record or transaction or makes a
wrongful or false entry therein or tempers or mutilates or
destroys pawn or property –
shall on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to two years and with fine which
may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees :
Provided that in absence of the special and adequate reason
to the contrary to be mentioned in the judgements of the
Court –
(i) for the first offence, such imprisonment shall not be less
than three months and such fine shall not be less than five
thousand rupees,
(ii) for the second and subsequent offences, such
imprisonment shall not be less than six months and such
fine shall not be less than ten thousand rupees.”
5.2 It is undisputed fact that the applicant is not
holding any licence under the Gujarat Money Lenders
Act and on bare reading of the FIR, it transpires that
though there is dispute between one Ramesh Gorasiya
and the present applicant, which is as per the
allegations made in the FIR settled between the
applicant and Ramesh Gorasiya and thereafter, it seems
that demand for money has been raised by the accused
and pursuant to that, six cheques were issued and
received by Dharmeshbhai Muljibhai Ranpariya. It is also
Page 8 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
coming out form the record that the applicant is
harassed to such extent that he has made attempt to
commit suicide by consuming poison and, therefore, it
cannot be said at this stage that the averments made in
the FIR given by the complainant is not constituting any
offence more particularly, under the provisions of the
Gujarat Money Lenders Act. On bare reading of the FIR,
it also transpires that prima faice, offence is constituted
under Section 506(2) of the IPC.
5.3 It is required to be noted that the complaint has
been lodged on 08.12.2024 and the present petition is
filed on 11.12.2024 i.e. immediately without co-operating
in the process of investigation. This trend is emerging
recently by the litigants instead of availing remedy by
way of filing application for anticipatory bail or after
arrest by filing regular bail, straightaway the petition is
being filed and that too within three days from the
registration of the FIR and that too, when the
investigation is at very nascent stage. Such attempt is
required to be discouraged on that counts also as the
provisions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. i.e. now new
Section 528 of the BNSS Act is not substitute of
Page 9 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
application for anticipatory bail and more particularly,
from the bare reading the FIR, prima facie, case is
made out and also it cannot be said that the present
FIR is clearly an attempt by the complainant to abuse
the process of law.
5.4 Further, in the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court
in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus
State of Maharashtra and Others reported in 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 315, and more particularly para 80 is
relevant, which is as under:
“80. In view of the above and for the reasons stated
above, our final conclusions on the principal/core
issue, whether the High Court would be justified in
passing an interim order of stay of investigation and/
or “no coercive steps to be adopted”, during the
pendency of the quashing petition under Section 482
Cr.P.C and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and in what circumstances and whether the
High Court would be justified in passing the order of
not to arrest the accused or “no coercive steps to be
adopted” during the investigation or till the final
report/chargesheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C.,
while dismissing/disposing of/not entertaining/notPage 10 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
quashing the criminal proceedings/complaint/FIR in
exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, our
final conclusions are as under:
i) Police has the statutory right and duty under the
relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure
contained in Chapter XIV of the Code to investigate
into a cognizable offence;
ii) Courts would not thwart any investigation into the
cognizable offences;
iii) It is only in cases where no cognizable offence or
offence of any kind is disclosed in the first
information report that the Court will not permit an
investigation to go on;
iv) The power of quashing should be exercised
sparingly with circumspection, as it has been
observed, in the ‘rarest of rare cases (not to be
confused with the formation in the context of death
penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of
which is sought, the court cannot embark upon an
enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness orPage 11 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
otherwise of the allegations made in the
FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at
the initial stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an
exception rather than an ordinary rule;
viii) Ordinarily, the courts are barred from usurping
the jurisdiction of the police, since the two organs of
the State operate in two specific spheres of activities
and one ought not to tread over the other sphere;
ix) The functions of the judiciary and the police are
complementary, not overlapping;
x) Save in exceptional cases where non-interference
would result in miscarriage of justice, the Court and
the judicial process should not interfere at the stage
of investigation of offences;
xi) Extraordinary and inherent powers of the Court
do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court
to act according to its whims or caprice;
xii) The first information report is not an
Page 12 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
encyclopaedia which must disclose all facts and
details relating to the offence reported. Therefore,
when the investigation by the police is in progress,
the court should not go into the merits of the
allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to
complete the investigation. It would be premature to
pronounce the conclusion based on hazy facts that the
complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated or
that it amounts to abuse of process of law. After
investigation, if the investigating officer finds that
there is no substance in the application made by the
complainant, the investigating officer may file an
appropriate report/summary before the learned
Magistrate which may be considered by the learned
Magistrate in accordance with the known procedure;
xiii) The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very
wide, but conferment of wide power requires the
court to be more cautious. It casts an onerous and
more diligent duty on the court;
xiv) However, at the same time, the court, if it
thinks fit, regard being had to the parameters of
quashing and the self-restraint imposed by law, more
particularly the parameters laid down by this Court
in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra) and Bhajan Lal
(supra), has the jurisdiction to quash thePage 13 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
FIR/complaint;
xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by
the alleged accused and the court when it exercises
the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to
consider whether the allegations in the FIR disclose
commission of a cognizable offence or not. The court
is not required to consider on merits whether or not
the merits of the allegations make out a cognizable
offence and the court has to permit the investigating
agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR;
xvi) The aforesaid parameters would be applicable
and/or the aforesaid aspects are required to be
considered by the High Court while passing an
interim order in a quashing petition in exercise of
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. However, an interim
order of stay of investigation during the pendency of
the quashing petition can be passed with
circumspection. Such an interim order should not
require to be passed routinely, casually and/or
mechanically. Normally, when the investigation is in
progress and the facts are hazy and the entire
evidence/material is not before the High Court, the
High Court should restrain itself from passing the
interim order of not to arrest or “no coercive steps toPage 14 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
be adopted” and the accused should be relegated to
apply for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
before the competent court. The High Court shall not
and as such is not justified in passing the order of
not to arrest and/or “no coercive steps” either during
the investigation or till the investigation is completed
and/or till the final report/chargesheet is filed under
Section 173 Cr.P.C., while dismissing/disposing of the
quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. xvii)
Even in a case where the High Court is prima facie
of the opinion that an exceptional case is made out
for grant of interim stay of further investigation,
after considering the broad parameters while
exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
referred to hereinabove, the High Court has to give
brief reasons why such an interim order is warranted
and/or is required to be passed so that it can
demonstrate the application of mind by the Court and
the higher forum can consider what was weighed
with the High Court while passing such an interim
order.
xviii) Whenever an interim order is passed by the
High Court of “no coercive steps to be adopted”
within the aforesaid parameters, the High Court must
Page 15 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/24673/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/12/2024
undefined
clarify what does it mean by “no coercive steps to be
adopted” as the term “no coercive steps to be
adopted” can be said to be too vague and/or broad
which can be misunderstood and/or misapplied.”
5.5 In view of the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, and considering that on bare reading of FIR,
prima facie, case is made out against the present
applicant for further investigation and considering the
fact that FIR is registered on 08.12.2024 and present
petition is filed on 11.12.2024, when investigation is at
very nascent stage and, therefore, the present petition is
found merit-less and, therefore, the same is required to
be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed with
no order as to costs.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
DIWAKAR SHUKLA
Page 16 of 16
Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 23 2024 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 23 21:22:57 IST 2024